Minnesota Statutes
Minn. Stat. § 550.01 (2026)
Enforcement Of Judgment
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official)
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
The party in whose favor a judgment is given, or the assignee of such judgment, may proceed to enforce the same, at any time within ten years after the entry thereof, in the manner provided by law.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1983–2026 · leading case: Dahlin v. Kroening, 784 N.W.2d 406 (Minn. Ct. App. 2010).
Dahlin v. Kroening, 784 N.W.2d 406 (Minn. Ct. App. 2010). “Minn.Stat. § 550.01 (2008). The legislature has specifically applied this determination to maintenance judgments.”
Benjamin Ojogwu v. Rodenburg Law Firm, 26 F.4th 457 (8th Cir. 2022). “at 296. Thus, the 2 Minnesota law provides that a judgment creditor, or its assignee, may enforce the judgment “at any time within ten years after the entry thereof.”
Sehlstrom v. Sehlstrom, 925 N.W.2d 233 (Minn. 2019). “For example, money judgments may not be collected after 10 years, see Minn. Stat. § 550.01 (2018) ("The party in whose favor a judgment is given .”
In re the Est. of Pawlik, 845 N.W.2d 249 (Minn. Ct. App. 2014). “However, Bond possesses the right to enforce the judgment by levying on Timothy’s property, see Minn.Stat. §§ 550.01, .10 (2012), and would have a lien once Timothy acquires the property and Bond complies with the recording requirement of Minn.”
Jensen v. Fhima, 731 N.W.2d 876 (Minn. Ct. App. 2007). “Appellant argues, however, that the enforceability period was not extended in Minnesota because under the Act the time period for the enforcement of a judgment is provided in Minn.Stat. § 550.01 (2006), and for purposes of that time period, “the date of the entry of a foreign…”
Johnson Bros. Wholesale Liquor Co. v. Clemmons, 661 P.2d 1242 (Kan. 1983). “Under Minn. Stat. Ann. § 550.01 (West 1947), a party in whose favor a judgment is given may proceed to enforce the same at any time within ten years after the entry thereof.”
Christensen Law Off., PLLC v. Olean, 916 N.W.2d 876 (Minn. Ct. App. 2018). “The district court granted relief, concluding in a May 2017 order that Christensen Law could enforce its attorney lien under Minn. Stat. §§ 550.01 -.42 (2016). In a June 2017 order, the district court sua sponte reversed its May 2017 ruling and determined that Christensen Law is…”
Bakken v. Helgeson, 785 N.W.2d 791 (Minn. Ct. App. 2010). “”); see also Minn.Stat. § 550.01 (providing that judgment must be enforced within ten years of its entry).”
Marriage of LaFreniere-Nietz v. Nietz, 547 N.W.2d 895 (Minn. Ct. App. 1996). “Appellant suggests that the district court order fails to promote equity because it denies her the ability to satisfy the judgment more quickly if respondent’s wages increase, it jeopardizes her ability to satisfy the judgment before its expiration under Minn.Stat. § 550.01…”
Anchor Gas, Inc. v. Border Black Top, Inc., 381 N.W.2d 96 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986). “A discussion of Rule 69 in Minnesota Practice provides in part: The tools for enforcement of a money judgment in Minnesota are contained in the statutes, particularly in Minn.Stat. Ann. § 550.01, et seq. That statute is not superseded or really supplemented by the Rule.”
Green v. Kellen, 921 N.W.2d 768 (Minn. Ct. App. 2018). “Minn. Stat. § 550.01 (2016). The challenged statute here limits the time period for execution to three years if the judgment is for "the unpaid balance of a debt on agricultural property owed by a farm debtor.”
Westchester Fire Ins. Co. v. Hasbargen, 632 N.W.2d 754 (Minn. Ct. App. 2001). “Rather than the usual ten-year period under Minn.Stat. 550.01 (2000), a judgment to enforce a mortgage debt on agricultural property is subject to a three-year limitation on execution.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.